Sequels Spider-Man 4 and 5 Shooting At The Same Time?

[Spider-Fan]

Using Ock again is unneccessary. Spidey has TONS of bankable villains left. Sony wants to sell new action figures. Not old ones.

 

[Blader5489]

Since the question was ask to both Sam Raimi and Avi Arad about shooting SM3/SM4 back-to-back, whom both have said Sony likes to take these films 'ONE' movie at a time.

No, the question was if there were any stories or villains planned for sequels, which is when Arad and co. said that they take the films one at a time. The reason they didn't shoot SM3 and 4 back-to-back was because the cast was only signed for three films.

And if it's true that SM4 and 5 may be shot back-to-back, then they're still taking the films one at a time. They're not planning ahead, they're simply taking one big story and splitting it in two.

 

[Rikxiepoo]

Ugh if Tobey hdnt done such a bad job in SM-3 (he looked fat and the acting wsnt as good as SM2) then this would have been easy to do. However, hope is not lost. IF they do film 2 films back to back new actors for the main leads while keeping the same secondary actors (like replacing Katie Holmes with Maggie in TDK) could work if they get a well known actor thats in his 20's to play Peter and the same goes for MJ.

Id keep Raimi as director or as a producer though, because he is awesome. The writer is the main factor here though, because it all depends on the story he decides to make.

No, the question was if there were any stories or villains planned for sequels, which is when Arad and co. said that they take the films one at a time. The reason they didn't shoot SM3 and 4 back-to-back was because the cast was only signed for three films.

And if it's true that SM4 and 5 may be shot back-to-back, then they're still taking the films one at a time. They're not planning ahead, they're simply taking one big story and splitting it in two.

I thought the reason was because Akiva Goldsman, the main writer of SM3, couldn't find a good way to split the movie into two? This probably just added to that or was the main reason though.

Anyways, If Sony was wises up after the SM3 budget (250ish million geez) they would do well to shoot sequels back to back to save money and provide a better story (like Harry Potter 7 is doing).

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Since the question was ask to both Sam Raimi and Avi Arad about shooting SM3/SM4 back-to-back, whom both have said Sony likes to take these films 'ONE' movie at a time.

As Spider-Fan said, they still could have changed their minds. That was a while ago.

 

[Venom 1988]

I thought the reason was because Akiva Goldsman, the main writer of SM3, couldn't find a good way to split the movie into two? This probably just added to that or was the main reason though.

That was one reason...but Blader is right

 

[weezerspider]

Personally, if the cast is changed, I want a TIH type sequel. Its not a re-boot, but its not a sequel. It just starts a new story about Spiderman this trillogy can stand alone from the old one.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Personally, if the cast is changed, I want a TIH type sequel. Its not a re-boot, but its not a sequel. It just starts a new story about Spiderman this trillogy can stand alone from the old one.

TIH is a reboot.

 

[Spider-Vader]

Using Ock again is unneccessary. Spidey has TONS of bankable villains left. Sony wants to sell new action figures. Not old ones.

Let's see, just at the top of my head:
Lizard
Kraven
Carnage
Hob Goblin
Mysterio
Scorpion
Rhino
Black Cat
Man-Wolf


I want Sam (as long as he doesn't write), Tobey & everyone else back except Dunst.

I think Kraven's Last Hunt would make a good story-line with Lizard in it. Then have at the end of 5 have a cameo of Venom, setting up for his solo film.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Let's see, just at the top of my head:
Lizard
Kraven
Carnage
Hob Goblin
Mysterio
Scorpion
Rhino
Black Cat
Man-Wolf


I want Sam (as long as he doesn't write), Tobey & everyone else back except Dunst.

I think Kraven's Last Hunt would make a good story-line with Lizard in it. Then have at the end of 5 have a cameo of Venom, setting up for his solo film.

Where is Electro in that list

Also agree with you on wanting everyone else back, plus doing KLH in SM4. Now, Venom cameo I disagree with. He's been used. let him go away in peace.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I said at the top of my head, Electro & Shocker weren't there.

A Venom movie has been confirmed, so why not have a set-up in S-M5 ala Avengers/IM.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Cause people would expect Venom in SM5 then. Iron Man is different since he was a central character in a team based book. Venom is a solo player. Putting him in another Spider-Man movie for a brief second tells people he'll be in the next Spidey movie. When you get them excited for that and only deliver a spin-off, people will feel jipped.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

REALLY hope we get Lizard and Scorpion as the villains, If Jameson has a hand in creating Scorpion like he did in the cartoon, only to have to beg Spiderman to stop him would be a good storyline for SM4 IMO.

 

[Spidey_87]

A few people were complaining about the nature of Kraven's villiany if he used in both SM 4 and 5. Let me remind you just how terrified Peter is of that man. Just go read the "Beware Of The Rage Of A Desperate Man" arc in Spider-Man 46-49 and you will see how great a villian Kraven is. Sure, this arc occured after his death, but Peter just seeing a picture of him gave him shivers.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think Lizard and Scorpion are too similar to be used in the same film. But, that's just me.

 

[Gamma Burst]

A few people were complaining about the nature of Kraven's villiany if he used in both SM 4 and 5. Let me remind you just how terrified Peter is of that man. Just go read the "Beware Of The Rage Of A Desperate Man" arc in Spider-Man 46-49 and you will see how great a villian Kraven is. Sure, this arc occured after his death, but Peter just seeing a picture of him gave him shivers.

Well remembered,Spidey_87

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Kraven is a great Villian so if his story does fall into part of Spidey5, I will have no problem with it. I mean, he probably would have only a few minutes of screentime in Spidey5 if he's in Spidey4. That's if he survives in Spidey4 though.

 

[IamProdigy]

That much we agree on...though I'm not sure what the hell bomb-diggity means, nor do I want to know.

It just means 'cool'...it was used in hip-hop a lot in the early 90s...when hip-hop was good...and we didn't have 50 Cent, Soulja Boy, et cetera to mess it up.

 

[IamProdigy]

Cause people would expect Venom in SM5 then. Iron Man is different since he was a central character in a team based book. Venom is a solo player. Putting him in another Spider-Man movie for a brief second tells people he'll be in the next Spidey movie. When you get them excited for that and only deliver a spin-off, people will feel jipped.

I say if you make any Marvel or DC movie, make them share the Universes...like, the X-Men, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four movies would have been awesome if they put in a couple of lines talking about the other heroes in New York...at least in Superman Returns, it said Superman being in Gotham, lol.

 

[GoldGoblin]

Can't wait,hope they are fans of the new spidey cartoon and use that show as a template.

 

[dex58]

.................

 

[Spade]

Whether or not people like it, the third film made money out the wazoo for Sony. Obviously, they want to continue making that much cash as often as possible. That's just in the interest of good business; there's really only so far they can appease negative folks without being Marvel Studios. Rebooting the franchise is risky for two reasons. For one, even though the reception of SM3 was negative it leaves enough room for a sequel that Sony could do a better job on a direct sequel. The other issue is how much power the continuing film franchise has. A reboot might not be for everyone, but a sequel has at least enough pull to get big numbers even if the turnout isn't nearly as big as it was for the third.

 

[Tag279]

SM-3 was not as good as SM-2 in a lot of regards it was too warm and fuzzy, and Venom IMO was not a big enough player. If they do a SM-4 and SM-5 Mary Jane Watson SHOULD NOT be a major part of the story.

The Sinister-6, Kraven, Electro, the Lizard, and or the Vulture would be great villains. The movies need to have more fights and have larger implications for the city. A re-boot may not be needed maybe a re-focusing. I don't think SM-3 closed a door on sequels for the franchise but IMO the SM movies need a bigger shot of testosterone.

 

[Styleshift]

I think a sinister six would over crowd the movie....

Otto is dead. and many will be disappointed since he is the original leader of the six. not that he can't be revived. but it'd be hard to translate well in a movie why this guy isn't dead and where he was at all this time....while trying to explain the origin of the other villians. and keeping everything balanced. that was one of the issues of spidey 3. needless cameos. on another note sandman is not a villain in the typical sense. so he's another original sinister six character thats automatically out.

I think it would be interesting to have the villains already encounter spidey, and show flash backs of them being humiliated by spidey in the past. (like the batman episode almost got em.)

Also the "spidey accidently kills his bad guys" shtick is getting REALLY old.

 

[Spade]

Alot of elements about the franchise are getting old. SM3 wasn't even original enough to go through with having Gwen be the damsel in distress, which would've at least switched things up a little. Hopefully, SM4 changes all of this.

 

[Tag279]

Truth be told SM-1 should have started out with Gwen Stacey. MJ should have come along later and not have been the girl next door. Remember Aunt May arranged their first date/ meeting.